Telehealth usability in a university student physiotherapy clinic during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: 'Telehealth' online delivery of physiotherapy was the only option during the Covid 19 pandemic in many areas. This was a challenge for physiotherapy training in student clinics where students, clinical educators (CEs) and clients were in three separate locations. The aim of this study was to determine the usability and acceptability of online delivery in a physiotherapy student clinic. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional design was used. Clients (adult clients or carers of paediatric clients), students and CEs participated in telehealth physiotherapy appointments over a Telehealth platform called NeoRehab. The three groups were then invited to complete the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ). The 21 item TUQ uses a 7-point Likert scale and covers six constructs (Usefulness, Ease of Use, Interface quality, Interaction quality, Reliability, Satisfaction). RESULTS: Data were analysed from 39 clients, 15 students, and seven CEs. The respective domain scores (SD) for Usefulness [(5.3 (1.5), 5.4 (0.7), 5.1 (0.7)] and Satisfaction [5.1 (1.6), 5.0 (1.0), 5.4 (0.7)] were similarly high across groups, while scores for Reliability [3.7 (1.5), 3.6 (1.0), 3.0 (0.5)] were similarly low across groups. Interface Quality [5.0 (1.5), 4.5 (1.2), 4.1 (0.8)] scores were similarly moderate. Ease of Use [5.6 (1.5), 5.3 (1.0), 4.1 (1.1)] scores were significantly higher in clients than CEs (p = 0.043). Interaction Quality [5.0 (1.4), 3.9 (1.3), 4.2 (0.9)] scores were significantly higher in clients compared with students (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: All groups agreed that the delivery format was useful, easy to use and provided a satisfactory service but was not reliable.

A comparison of visual and direct assessments of lumbar spine posture.

BACKGROUND: Posture is assessed clinically and used to guide treatment of low back pain. Collectively, the relevance of posture and clinical postural assessments have come under scrutiny. This study aimed to determine (a) the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of visual assessments of lumbar lordosis, and (b) the agreement between visual and direct postural assessments. METHODS: Ten physiotherapists visually assessed the lumbar lordosis from 3D scans of 50 asymptomatic participants, and 15 duplicates, using a grading scale of deviations (range: 0 = normal to 3 = severe). Lumbar lordosis angle was directly assessed using the Vitus Smart 3D whole body scanner. Cohen's Kappa was used to determine the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of visual assessments, with polyserial correlation (ps) used to determine the agreement between visual and direct assessments. RESULTS: Overall, 93% and 83% of all intra-rater and inter-rater differences in visual assessments were within a single grade point, respectively. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of visual assessments was moderate (κ (95%CI): 0.56 (0.45, 0.67)) and slight (κ (95%CI): 0.13 (0.08, 0.19)), respectively. The agreement between visual and direct assessments was moderate (ps = -0.41, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Visual assessments of lumbar posture demonstrated moderate repeatability and agreement with quantitative assessments. While agreement between assessors was slight, 83% of the visual ratings were within a single grade point, suggesting greater coherence among clinicians than our statistics suggested. As with any clinical assessments involving uncertainty, postural assessment should not solely guide treatment.

Axillary Reverse Mapping Aids in Reducing the Rates of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema in Underserved Ethnically Diverse Population.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) poses a significant risk following sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), particularly affecting ethnic minorities, with a twofold increased risk. Axillary reverse mapping (ARM), a novel technique, shows potential in reducing BCRL rates, yet its utility in ethnic minorities lacks sufficient exploration. Therefore, our study aims to investigate the utility and outcomes of ARM on BCRL in an ethnic diverse group. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of ARM patients from January 2019 to July 2022 was conducted, monitoring patients over 24 months at 3-month intervals using SOZO® scores, with comparisons with preoperative baselines. RESULTS: Of the 212 patients, 83% belonged to ethnic minorities. SLNB was performed in 83%, ALND in 17%, and 62.3% underwent radiation therapy. Positive lymph nodes were found in 31.6%, with 22.2% exhibiting blue nodes and 25.9% exhibiting blue lymphatics. Of identified blue nodes, 70.2% were excised, including 51.5% crossover nodes. Lymphedema occurred in 3 patients, resulting in a BCRL rate of 1.4%. Compared with an historical BCRL incidence of 40.4% following ALND in ethnic minorities, our study reported a significantly lower rate of 8% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The ARM procedure can significantly lower BCRL in ethnic minority groups. The combination of ARM and bioimpedance spectroscopy led to a remarkably low BCRL rate of 1.4%. Notably, none of the patients in our study developed an axillary recurrence at 24-month follow-up. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to better understand the utility of the ARM technique in this population.

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) vs. mastectomy with reconstruction: a comparison of outcomes in an underserved population.

Background: Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) has demonstrated superior cosmetic outcomes to traditional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) while maintaining oncologic safety. While prior studies have compared OBCS to mastectomy, there is a scarcity of literature on the impact of social determinants of health on outcomes. Furthermore, although traditionally tumors larger than 5 cm and multifocal disease were treated with mastectomy, the literature has now shown OBCS to be safe in treating such disease. As a result, patients with large or multifocal tumors could be eligible for both mastectomy and OBCS, which prompts the need for comparison between the two. Thus, the aim of our study was to compare OBCS and mastectomy with reconstruction using BREAST-Q and oncologic outcome measures, as well as stratify these outcomes based on race, ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI). Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed for 57 patients treated with OBCS and 204 patients treated with mastectomy with reconstruction from 2015 to 2021. Variables including age, race, ethnicity, BMI, insurance status, surgery type, pathology, recurrence, and complications were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using BREAST-Q pre- and post-operatively. Results: Despite having a higher BMI (P<0.001), OBCS yielded higher "satisfaction with breast" and "satisfaction with outcome" than mastectomy (P=0.02 and P=0.02, respectively). When stratified by race, there were no statistical differences in the PROs between the two surgeries for Hispanic nor African American patients. OBCS had a significantly lower rate of infection and fewer additional surgeries than mastectomy (P=0.004 and P<0.001, respectively). There were no differences in positive margin rate or recurrence rate between the groups. Conclusions: In our study, OBCS yielded better PROs than mastectomy while maintaining oncologic safety and resulting in fewer surgeries and complications. These excellent outcomes in a majority non-Caucasian cohort support the utilization of OBCS for underserved, minority populations. Larger studies evaluating PROs in diverse and uninsured groups are needed to reinforce these conclusions.

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma-a rare salivary gland-type tumor of the breast: are we dealing with primary or secondary?-a case report and literature review.

Background: Salivary gland-like tumors are extremely unusual in the breast, and their histology is very similar to primary salivary gland neoplasms. Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC), a common salivary gland tumor, displays an infrequent occurrence in the breast, accounting for a mere 0.2-0.3% incidence. Given its rarity, it is critical to accurately distinguish it from metastatic cases before diagnosing it as a primary breast MEC for appropriate treatment. Currently, there is no consensus on the treatment of MEC, and there is a paucity of literature highlighting the ideal treatment modality, especially for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cancers. Therefore, the aim of our case report was to underscore the diagnostic process, surgical and adjunctive treatments for our patient with ER-positive, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative MEC while also conducting a literature review to contribute to the limited existing data. Case Description: A 67-year-old African American woman presented with a lobulated 3.1-cm left breast mass on mammography, for which she underwent ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy that revealed invasive carcinoma with squamous differentiation. The carcinoma was ER-positive, PR-negative and HER2-negative. Subsequently, she underwent a lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy. Her final pathology revealed an intermediate-grade MEC with negative lymph nodes. She had a past medical history of benign salivary gland tumor, as well as a family history of BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1)-associated breast cancer in her daughter. Conclusions: MEC of the breast is a rare tumor with a relatively favorable overall prognosis. The early and precise diagnosis of this condition plays a pivotal role in formulating effective treatment strategies and ensuring positive survival rates. Nonetheless, future studies are recommended to further explore the role of surgical approaches and adjuvant therapy to improve treatment outcomes.

Does Nipple-Ward Positive Margin Contribute to a Higher Rate of Re-Excision Procedures After a Lumpectomy with Pathology-Confirmed Positive Margins? A Retrospective Study.

Background: Positive margins on lumpectomy specimens are associated with a twofold increased risk of local breast tumor recurrence. Prior literature has demonstrated various techniques and modalities for assessing margin status to reduce re-excision rates. However, there is paucity of literature analyzing which margin contributes to the highest re-excision rates. Therefore, the primary aim of the study was to investigate whether the nipple-ward margins resulted in a higher rate of re-excision in our patient population. Methods:  A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had re-excision surgery. Nipple-ward margin was identified by correlating radiological and pathological reports. A cut-off of more than 25% was used to demonstrate correlation between nipple-ward margin and re-excision rate. Results: A total of 98 patients' data were analyzed, with 41 (41.8%), 14 (14.3%), 5 (5.1%), and 38 (38.8%) diagnosed with DCIS, IDC, ILC, and mixed pathology on their margins, respectively. Overall, 48% (n=47) of the positive margins were nipple-ward, with 44.7% (n=21) reporting DCIS. Upon stratification, 45 (45.9%) cases were single-margin positive, with 26 (57.8%) being nipple-ward. Furthermore, the remaining 53 (54.1%) patients had multiple positive margins, with 21 (39.6.7%) nipple-ward cases. Conclusion: Positive nipple-ward margins significantly contribute to a higher re-excision rate p < 0.001; 48% of re-excision surgeries had positive nipple-ward margins, and 57.8% of positive single-margin cases were nipple-ward. Taking an additional shave during initial lumpectomy decreases re-excision rates. However, planning a lumpectomy procedure with a more elliptical rather than a spherical resection with additional cavity shave (ie, larger volume) in the nipple-ward direction and minimizing the remaining cavity shaves so the total volume resected remains unchanged. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to bolster our findings.

Can the Clinical Utility of iBreastExam, a Novel Device, Aid in Optimizing Breast Cancer Diagnosis? A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: A portable, cost-effective, easy-to-use, hand-held Intelligent Breast Exam (iBE), which is a wireless, radiation-free device, may be a valuable screening tool in resource-limited settings. While multiple studies evaluating the use of iBE have been conducted worldwide, there are no cumulative studies evaluating the iBE's performance. Therefore this review aims to determine the clinical utility and applicability of iBE compared with clinical breast examinations, ultrasound, and mammography and discuss its strengths and weaknesses when performing breast-cancer screening. METHODS: A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Four electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. RESULTS: The review included 11 studies with a total sample size of 16,052 breasts. The mean age ranged from 42 to 58 years. The sensitivity and specificity of the iBE ranged from 34.3% to 86% and 59% to 94%, respectively. For malignant lesions, iBE demonstrated a moderate to higher diagnostic capacity ranging from 57% to 93% and could identify tumor sizes spanning from 0.5 cm to 9 cm. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the potential clinical utility and applicability of iBE as a prescreening and triaging tool, which may aid in reducing the burden of patients undergoing diagnostic imaging in lower- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, iBE has shown to diagnose cancers as small as 0.5 cm, which can be a boon in early detection and reduce mortality rates. However, the encouraging results of this systematic review should be interpreted with caution because of the device's low sensitivity and high false-positive rates.

Case Report: Bilateral targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: a safe and effective alternative for synchronous bilateral breast cancer.

Background: The incidence of bilateral breast cancer (BBC) ranges from 1.4% to 11.8%. BBC irradiation is a challenge in current clinical practice due to the large target volume that must be irradiated while minimizing the dose to critical organs. Supine or prone breast techniques can be used, with the latter providing better organ sparing; both, however, result in lengthy treatment times. The use of Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) in breast cancer patients who choose breast conservation has been highlighted in previous studies, but there is a scarcity of literature analyzing the utility and applicability of IORT in BBC. This case series aims to highlight the applicability of administering bilateral IORT in patients with BBC. Case reports: Five patients with bilateral early-stage breast cancer (or DCIS) were treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by bilateral IORT. Of the 10 breast cancers, 8 were diagnosed as either DCIS or IDC, while the other 2 were diagnosed as invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive carcinoma, respectively. During surgery, all patients received bilateral IORT. Furthermore, 1 patient received external beam radiation therapy after her final pathology revealed grade 3 DCIS. The IORT procedure was well tolerated by all five patients, and all patients received aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy. Additionally, none of these patients showed evidence of disease after a 36-month median follow-up. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate the successful use of IORT for BCS in patients with BBC. Furthermore, none of the patients in our study experienced any complications, suggesting the feasibility of the use of IORT in BBC. Considering the benefits of improved patient compliance and a reduced number of multiple visits, IORT may serve as an excellent patient-centered alternative for BBC. Future studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability of IORT in patients with BBC.

Experience with intraoperative radiation therapy in an urban cancer center.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT) is a newer partial breast irradiation technique that has been well studied in 2 large randomized trials, the TARGIT-A and ELIOT trials. We initiated our IORT program in 2018 in the context of a registry trial, and aim to report our early results thus far. METHODS: We instituted an IORT practice using Intrabeam® low energy 50kVp x-rays for selected breast cancer cases in 2018. Patients were enrolled on our institutional registry protocol which allowed for IORT in ER + patients with grade 1-2 DCIS ≤ 2.5 cm or invasive disease ≤ 3.5 cm in patients of at least 45 years of age. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, 181 patients with clinical stage 0-IIA ER + breast cancer were evaluated. One hundred sixty-seven patients ultimately received IORT to 172 sites. The majority of patients received IORT at the time of initial diagnosis and surgery (160/167; 95.8%). Re-excision post IORT occurred in 16/167 patients (9.6%) due to positive margins. Adjuvant RT to the whole breast +/- LN was ultimately given to 23/167 (13.8%) patients mainly due to positive sentinel LN found on final pathology (12/23; 52%); other reasons were close margins for DCIS (3/23; 13%), tumor size (3/23; 4.3%), and multifactorial (5/23; 17.4%). Five patients (3%) had post-operative complications of wound dehiscence. There were 3 local recurrences (1.6%) at a median follow-up of 27.9 months (range: 0.7- 54.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: IORT has been proven to be a safe and patient-centered form of local adjuvant RT for our population, in whom compliance with a longer course of external beam radiation can be an issue. Long term efficacy remains to be evaluated through continued follow up. In the era of COVID-19 and beyond, IORT has been an increasingly attractive option, as it greatly minimizes toxicities and patient visits to the clinic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: All patients were prospectively enrolled on an institutional review board-approved registry trial (IRB number: 2018-9409).

Implementing shared decision making for early-stage breast cancer treatment using a coproduction learning collaborative: the SHAIR Collaborative protocol.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) in breast cancer care improves outcomes, but it is not routinely implemented. Results from the What Matters Most trial demonstrated that early-stage breast cancer surgery conversation aids, when used by surgeons after brief training, improved SDM and patient-reported outcomes. Trial surgeons and patients both encouraged using the conversation aids in routine care. We will develop and evaluate an online learning collaborative, called the SHared decision making Adoption Implementation Resource (SHAIR) Collaborative, to promote early-stage breast cancer surgery SDM by implementing the conversation aids into routine preoperative care. Learning collaboratives are known to be effective for quality improvement in clinical care, but no breast cancer learning collaborative currently exists. Our specific aims are to (1) provide the SHAIR Collaborative resources to clinical sites to use with eligible patients, (2) examine the relationship between the use of the SHAIR Collaborative resources and patient reach, and (3) promote the emergence of a sustained learning collaborative in this clinical field, building on a partnership with the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS). METHODS: We will conduct a two-phased implementation project: phase 1 pilot at five sites and phase 2 scale up at up to an additional 32 clinical sites across North America. The SHAIR Collaborative online platform will offer free access to conversation aids, training videos, electronic health record and patient portal integration guidance, a feedback dashboard, webinars, support center, and forum. We will use RE-AIM for data collection and evaluation. Our primary outcome is patient reach. Secondary data will include (1) patient-reported data from an optional, anonymous online survey, (2) number of active sites and interviews with site champions, (3) Normalization MeAsure Development questionnaire data from phase 1 sites, adaptations data utilizing the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Extended/-Implementation Strategies, and tracking implementation facilitating factors, and (4) progress on sustainability strategy and plans with ASBrS. DISCUSSION: The SHAIR Collaborative will reach early-stage breast cancer patients across North America, evaluate patient-reported outcomes, engage up to 37 active sites, and potentially inform engagement factors affecting implementation success and may be sustained by ASBrS.

Mindfulness and Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: An Umbrella Review.

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMSP) disorders are a leading cause of disability globally, affecting up to one in three people. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) have become a popular treatment for CMSP. The aim of this umbrella review was to synthesise the best available research evidence for the effectiveness of MBI for adults with CMSP. Methods: Eight databases were searched from inception to 30th June 2021 for systematic reviews that examined the use of MBI in CMSP (pain experienced >3 months) in adult populations. Two reviewers independently conducted screening and selection, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality using The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews tool (AMSTAR 2). Outcomes examined were pain, sleep quality, depression, quality of life, physical functioning, and mindfulness. Furthermore, definitions of mindfulness, and intervention parameters (mindfulness practices used, length, frequency of sessions, duration) were also reported. Results: Nineteen systematic reviews (n = 1 rated high quality, n = 1 moderate quality, n = 2 low quality and n = 15 critically low quality) examining 194 primary studies met the review criteria. Although some promising evidence was identified for the use of MBI in CMSP, the general low quality and widespread heterogeneity of included SRs and made it difficult to reach a definitive conclusion. Differences in results and outcomes amongst systematic reviews that, in many cases, had a high overlap of included RCTs, suggests fundamental differences in critical design elements that make data difficult to compare. Conclusion: This umbrella review found mixed results on the effectiveness of MBI for the management of CMSP across a range of outcomes (pain, sleep quality, depression, quality of life, physical functioning, mindfulness). Definitions of MBI varied as did parameters, which may have contributed to these mixed results. More rigorous research with stringent MBI protocols is required.

The prevention and treatment of breast cancer- related lymphedema: A review.

Background: Breast cancer- related lymphedema (BCRL) affects about 3 to 5 million patients worldwide, with about 20,000 per year in the United States. As breast cancer mortality is declining due to improved diagnostics and treatments, the long-term effects of treatment for BCRL need to be addressed. Methods: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Lymphatic Surgery Working Group conducted a large review of the literature in order to develop guidelines on BCRL prevention and treatment. This was a comprehensive but not systematic review of the literature. This was inclusive of recent randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and reviews evaluating the prevention and treatment of BCRL. There were 25 randomized clinical trials, 13 systemic reviews and meta-analyses, and 87 observational studies included. Results: The findings of our review are detailed in the paper, with each guideline being analyzed with the most recent data that the group found evidence of to suggest these recommendations. Conclusions: Prevention and treatment of BCRL involve a multidisciplinary team. Early detection, before clinically apparent, is crucial to prevent irreversible lymphedema. Awareness of risk factors and appropriate practice adjustments to reduce the risk aids are crucial to decrease the progression of lymphedema. The treatment can be costly, time- consuming, and not always effective, and therefore, the overall goal should be prevention.

Case Report: Can Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer and Pacemakers be the New Standard of Care?

Background: Partial breast irradiation with Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) has become a popular management option as opposed to whole breast radiation using external beam radiotherapy for breast cancer patients. While previous studies have highlighted the use of IORT in breast cancer patients, there is a scarcity of literature on the use of IORT in those who also have ipsilateral pacemakers. Thus, the aim of our case report is to highlight the applicability of IORT in breast cancer patients who also have a pacemaker. Case Reports: Two female patients with an implanted dual-chamber pacemaker presented with a diagnosis of left-sided invasive ductal carcinoma on mammogram. Mammography of the left breast revealed a 10 mm and 7 mm spiculated mass, respectively, further confirmed with an ultrasound-guided core biopsy that was conclusive of clinical Stage I T1 N0 grade 2, ER +, PR + Her2 - invasive ductal carcinoma. They met our eligibility criteria for IORT, which is being performed as a registry trial. These patients underwent a wide excision lumpectomy along with IORT. Conclusion: Our findings underscore the successful use of targeted IORT for breast-conserving surgery in a patient with invasive ductal carcinoma and pacemaker, hence eliminating the necessity for relocating pacemaker surgeries in these patients. Furthermore, no device failure or malfunction for the pacemaker was recorded before, during, or after the surgery, demonstrating the safety of using IORT in patients with preinstalled pacemaker despite a lack of evidence on safe radiation dosage or manufacturer guidelines. Nonetheless, the effects of IORT on pacemaker < 10 cm were not studied in our patients and further clinical studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability and safe distance of IORT in breast cancer patients with pacemaker.

Schedules of standing and sitting directed by musculoskeletal discomfort in workers transitioning to sit-stand workstations: a cross-sectional study.

Sit-stand workstations are growing in popularity, however limited guidelines exist regarding optimal schedules of sitting and standing. This was the first known study to observe sit-stand workstation schedules when postural change is based on maintaining musculoskeletal discomfort within 'acceptable' levels. Fourteen healthy adults new to sit-stand workstations completed computer-based work at a sit-stand desk for half a workday. Participants changed between standing and sitting postures each time discomfort reached the maximum acceptable threshold. On average, the amount of standing and sitting was greatest in the first standing (median 40 minutes, interquartile range 40 minutes) and sitting (median 30 minutes, interquartile range 115 minutes) bouts. Average durations spent standing and sitting were lower in all consecutive bouts. Stand-sit ratios indicated an equal amount of standing to sitting or somewhat less standing. The schedules had substantial inter-participant variability. Future studies should consider that optimal schedules may vary with regard to time and be individual-specific.

Refined guidelines are needed regarding effective use of sit-stand workstations. This study proposed a novel method of investigating potentially optimal schedules, in which postural change was based on reaching a threshold of musculoskeletal discomfort. The findings suggest that an optimal schedule may vary with time and be individual-specific. Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; Borg CR-10 scale: Borg Category Ratio-10 scale; IQR: interquartile range; LMD questionnaire: the localised musculoskeletal discomfort questionnaire; MHT: maximum holding time; SD: standard deviation.

A novel blinding protocol to test participant and therapist blinding during dry needling: a randomised controlled experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Dry needling is widely used in physiotherapy. Lack of blinding in clinical trials means that dry needling effects and mechanisms remain unclear, with blinding issues accepted as an unavoidable barrier to better evidence. The authors aimed to overcome this barrier by designing a protocol to double-blind dry needling trials. DESIGN: A prospectively registered randomised experiment tested a novel blinding protocol for blinding effectiveness. SETTING: University physiotherapy clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Therapists (n=15) and asymptomatic volunteers ('recipients') (n=45) were randomly allocated to real and/or sham interventions. INTERVENTIONS: The protocol involved custom-made needles and cognitive and multisensory blinding techniques. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was guesses about allocation. The a priori criterion for successful blinding was ≤50% correct guesses (random chance). Secondary analyses explored blinding patterns using blinding indices. RESULTS: Correct guesses were not different from 50% for therapists [41% (95%CI 30 to 50), n=120 guesses] or recipients [49% (95%CI 38 to 60), n=90 guesses]. Blinding indices supported the primary result but revealed that recipients were better at detecting real dry needling than sham. CONCLUSION: Both therapists and recipients were successfully blinded, which contrasts with the widely held assumption that double-blinding is impossible for needling interventions. The authors recommend that any future trials can, and therefore should, blind therapists. However, secondary analyses revealed that recipients receiving real dry needling were less blinded than sham recipients, which may still create bias in clinical trials and suggests further work is needed to improve recipient blinding. Nonetheless, the current findings offer an opportunity to gain better evidence concerning the effects and mechanisms of dry needling. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/rkzeb/.

A collaborative experiential problem-solving approach to develop shams for complex physical interventions: a case study of dry needling.

OBJECTIVE: Complex physical interventions are widely used in physiotherapy, despite doubts over the validity of clinical trial results due to lack of credible shams. Credible shams are critically needed, so too, therefore, is a process by which they can be developed. The authors used a novel methodology to develop and test blinding protocols for dry needling, a complex physical intervention for which blinding is particularly difficult. DESIGN: The research design was a practical three-day workshop influenced by Participatory Action Research, which uses iteration and reflection to solve a problem. PARTICIPANTS: Five multidisciplinary experts (researchers, clinicians, technician, magician) were invited. Healthy volunteers ('recipients', n=17) and accredited physiotherapists (n=6) were recruited to enable testing of blinding strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were expert opinion on the potential to blind recipients/therapists for (1) individual blinding strategies, and (2) entire blinding protocols. Secondary outcomes included recipient/therapist blinding effectiveness and acceptability. RESULTS: Experts iteratively developed 11 blinding protocols involving 22 blinding strategies. Experts rated 18 of the blinding strategies to 'definitely have potential' and identified four categories: knowledge of the sham, clinical interaction, disinformation, and sensation. Recipient and therapist blinding became more successful as the protocols evolved. CONCLUSIONS: Credible shams capable of simultaneous recipient and therapist blinding have been regarded to be impossible in dry needling. The preliminary success of the devised protocols suggest that our novel approach may be a crucial step in sham development. Improvements in expert rankings and blinding effectiveness as the protocols progressed support the value of this workshop approach.

To what extent is telehealth reported to be incorporated into undergraduate and postgraduate allied health curricula: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has become a necessity within the medical and allied health professions since the COVID-19 Pandemic generated a rapid uptake worldwide. It is now evident that this health delivery format will remain in use well into the future. However, health education training, most particularly allied health, has been slow to 'catch up' and adapt curriculum to ensure graduates are equipped with the knowledge and skills to implement telehealth in the workplace. The aim of this study was to gain a comprehensive understanding of current telehealth curricula in undergraduate and postgraduate allied health education training programs, with a focus on the aims, objectives, content, format, delivery, timeline and assessments. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, ERIC and relevant grey literature was conducted. Students studying allied health degrees through formal education at either postgraduate or undergraduate level were included, while nursing, dentistry and medical students were excluded. The data from the included studies was extracted and tabulated by country, participants, program and content. RESULTS: Of the 4484 studies screened, eleven met the eligibility criteria. All studies were published after 2012, highlighting the recency of research in this area. The studies were conducted in four countries (Australia, United Sates of America, United Kingdom, Norway) and participants were from various allied health professions. Of the included studies, four related to undergraduate programs, four to postgraduate programs and for the remaining three, this was not specified. Curricula were delivered through a combination of online and face-to-face delivery, with assessment tasks, where reported, comprising mainly multiple-choice and written tests. CONCLUSION: Published reporting of telehealth curricula within allied health programs is limited. Even the minority of programs that do include a telehealth component lack a systematic approach. This indicates that further primary research would be beneficial in this area.

Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

Tremendous progress has been made over the past several decades in the treatment of breast cancer. Mortality and recurrence rates continue to decline. Our ability to tailor patient- and tumor-specific treatments has rapidly advanced. The vast majority of our patients can safely have breast conservation. Unfortunately, for many patients, survivorship is burdened by ongoing quality-of-life issues. Most breast cancer patients are asymptomatic at presentation, and the onus is on us to preserve this. Surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy can result in long-term toxicities that can be amplified with multimodality approaches. We must strive to apply minimally effective therapies rather than a maximally tolerated approach. Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a particularly dreaded chronic complication. This review strives to give the reader a better understanding of BCRL and shed light on wisely choosing an integration of treatment modalities that minimizes BCRL risk. Key literature on emerging concepts is highlighted.